Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

If We Want Good Health Care from Obama, We Better Push Him to Change His Plan

By Chris Hedges, Truthdig. Posted September 2, 2008.


Barack Obama's health care plan coddles the corporations that profit from the misery and illnesses of tens of millions of Americans.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Chris Hedges

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Barack Obama's health care plan coddles the corporations that profit from the misery and illnesses of tens of millions of Americans. The plan is naive, at best, and probably disingenuous when it insists that we can coax these corporations, which are listed on the stock exchange and exist to maximize profit, to transform themselves into social service agencies that will provide adequate health care for all Americans. I wish we lived in such a rosy world. I know, and I suspect Obama knows, that we do not.

"Obama offers a false hope," said Dr. John Geyman, the former chair of family medicine at the University of Washington and author of "Do Not Resuscitate: Why the Health Insurance Industry Is Dying, and How We Must Replace It." "We cannot build on or tweak the present system. Different states have tried this. The problem is the private insurance industry itself. It is not as efficient as a publicly financed system. It fragments risk pools, skimming off the healthier part of the population and leaving the rest uninsured or underinsured. Its administrative and overhead costs are five to eight times higher than public financing through Medicare. It cares more about its shareholders than its enrollees or patients. A family of four now pays about $12,000 a year just in premiums, which have gone up by 87 percent from 2000 to 2006. The insurance industry is pricing itself out of the market for an ever larger part of the population. The industry resists regulation. It is unsustainable by present trends."

We face a health crisis. The Democratic and Republican parties, awash in campaign contributions from the beasts they should be slaying on our behalf, have no interest in addressing it. A report in the journal Health Affairs estimates that, if the system is left unchanged, one of every five dollars spent by Americans in 2017 will go to health coverage. Half of all bankruptcies in America are because families are unable to pay their medical bills. There are some 46 million Americans without coverage and tens of millions more with inadequate policies that severely limit what kinds of procedures and treatments they can receive.

"There are at least 25 million Americans who are underinsured," said Dr. Geyman. "Whatever coverage they have does not come close to covering the actual cost of a major illness or accident."

Obama, like John McCain, did not support HR 676, the single-payer legislation. The corporations that run our for-profit health care industry, which would be shut down if the bill was enacted, have vigorously fought it through campaign contributions and armies of lobbyists. A study by Harvard Medical School found that national health insurance would save the country $350 billion a year. But Medicare does not make campaign contributions. The private health care industries do. They have lavished money on Obama. He received $708,000 from medical and insurance interests between 2001 and 2006, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. And Michelle Obama is a vice president for community and external affairs at the University of Chicago Hospitals, a position that paid her $316,962 annually.

"The private health insurance companies and the pharmaceutical industry completely and totally oppose national health insurance," said Dr. Stephanie Woolhandler, one of the founders of Physicians for a National Health Program. "The private health insurance companies would go out of business. The pharmaceutical companies are afraid that a national health program will, as in Canada, be able to negotiate lower drug prices. Canadians pay 40 percent less for their drugs. We see this on a smaller scale in the United States, where the Department of Defense is able to negotiate pharmaceutical prices that are 40 percent lower."

Sen. Obama argues that we can improve the system by expanding government oversight. The government, he says, should require doctors and hospitals to prove they provide quality care. His plan links payment with reported quality. This would mean that health care providers would have to hire even larger staffs to collect and report this data to the government. There would be a $10-billion federal investment in health care information technology over five years under the Obama plan, in essence turning record keeping from paper to electronic data.

Obama's plan, said Dr. Don McCanne, who writes on health care issues, would actually make health plans "more expensive, which compounds the problem."

Obama says he would require insurance companies to use more income from premiums for patient care.

"There isn't an enforcement mechanism," Geyman said bluntly. "Most states have been unable to control rates or set a cap on rates."

Obama's plan would also not cover all Americans. Unlike in Canada, citizens would not be enrolled in a plan automatically. Americans would have to go looking for one they could afford. And if they could not find one they would remain uninsured. Dr. Woolhandler, who is also a professor at Harvard Medical School, estimates that "tens of millions" of Americans would remain uninsured under Obama's plan. These numbers would swell as employers, who provide plans for 59 percent of those who are employed, continue to reduce coverage.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: health care, barack obama

Chris Hedges, a Pulitzer prize-winning reporter, is a Senior Fellow at the Nation Institute. His latest book is Collateral Damage: America's War Against Iraqi Civilians.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Medicare for All ...Now !
Posted by: mmckinl on Sep 2, 2008 12:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Chris Hedges has laid it all out. We need Medicare for all now!

The United States spends 17% of GDP on healthcare. The rest of the G8 spend an average of 9% of GDP on healthcare. Government, on all levels, local, state, federal, medicare, medicaid, children's health care and veterans pay more than 60% of the healthcare bill today while the Insurance Companies cherry pick corporate accounts and healthy customers while those with problems lose out. The new Census Report reported that healthcare coverage actually went up, because more people had to resort to Medicare and Medicaid!Coverage under business went down yet again.

"Medicare for all" is a natural campaign slogan yet the Democrats choose to dance around the issue ad naseum. They have their snouts so far in the trough of healthcare contributions they can't seem to hear the cries of their constituents or see that our health care system is not a system but a state of chaos.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Medicare for All ...Now ! Posted by: KDelphi5950
» RE: Medicare for All ...Now ! Posted by: KDelphi5950
Congress - A useless entity?
Posted by: georgiaorwell on Sep 2, 2008 1:10 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We definitely need Universal Healthcare, which works wonderfully in other countries (European models work fantastically). Our healthcare system is a disgrace - another example of our Congress rarely working positively in behalf of its own people. Medicare Now for All would dramatically change our country and its citizens' lives.

Congress needs to also:
Vote to stop invading other countries for oil/natural resources and end the Iraq /Afghanistan wars
Rescind the new bankruptcy law
Reduce interest rates on student loans to a permanent low interest rate, including career training loans
Cancel student loans with regular on-time payments after 10 years
End fascist police actions against peaceful demonstrations
End illegal wire-tapping
Totally reform educational systems
Become a parliamentary democracy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama neverf wanted to change the status quo once in Washington.
Posted by: maxpayne on Sep 2, 2008 1:19 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So what makes you think he'll even bother once he's president? Don't believe me? Here, read this:

Mr. Obama Goes to Washington

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Two choices
Posted by: Obama2008Fan on Sep 2, 2008 1:34 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Vote for McCain and get NO health plan at all. Or support Obama and hope he'll improve his.

Not being brain dead, I prefer the latter option.

Obama Fan
Why Hillary fans should vote against Sen. McCain

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Two choices Posted by: annekarina
» RE: Two choices Posted by: KDelphi5950
Reclaiming our American Heritage
Posted by: using on Sep 2, 2008 6:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree whole heartedly, that we must begin to teach a lesson.
However, I disagree with taking the vote at this point away from the Obama, for he is the only one that has a real chance of getting elected. As I remember it the others are not even on all the state voting machines, are they?
A vote for anyone other than Obama is a vote for McBush.
So, back to I agree, but I agree that we need to be able to take a stand. But what evidence o you have that we are at this point able to? By taking our votes away from Obama and the democrats and helping McBush win, are we really punishing the Democratic party who you say are feeding from the same tough as the Republicans? Will we end up better off with McCain?
At this point, step one is to derail the Republican agenda. Step two is to try and hold Obama to his words and even stand up for more. I believe that we do have to fight for a better health care system but we also have to investigate services (there is plenty to be said there) We have corruption all over, it is just that the drug and health care are strangling us big time.
However, I do beleive that we need to unite -- to become a strong progressive "people count" party that can grow enough power to negotiate changes and support our candidate if need be to grow a strong enough party of our own.
But, for right now, we do not have that power and I do not see where we have organized and are ready to make a stand that can bring about change. However, with Obama, at the least we can gain some time away from the excelleration of the downwards spiril we are experiencing and at the most he will rise to the occasion of great leadership and create some programs and carve some sustainable paths that we can grow on. We are drowning -- and we cannot take a McCain gamble on a Bush type leadership.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Now we finally see... Posted by: jvaljon1
» RE: Now we finally see... Posted by: Bittersham2
» RE: Now we finally see... Posted by: kimbari
Sounds like utopia.
Posted by: paula.c on Sep 3, 2008 3:59 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And maybe someday we will be fortunate enough to have such a comprehensive health care et al plan. However, in the countries that have such health plans taxes are extremely high. I am willing to pay but the voters in this country would probably not.

Obama's plan may be watered down but it's far better than McCain's.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Sounds like utopia. Posted by: KDelphi5950
» RE: Sounds like utopia. Posted by: dp1228
» You've Swallowed the BIG LIE. Posted by: armorypk
Is a campaign promise a verbal contract?
Posted by: Robert Thompson on Sep 3, 2008 4:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm South African, so I am unfamiliar with US Law, but I was wondering whether in your legal system a campaign promise constitutes a verbal contract?

In our law if you make a promise in exchange for some benefit, like a vote, then a contract has been formed and you are contractually bound to uphold your side of the bargain. If you don't then you can be sued civilly.

It might be an interesting tactic if progressives began suing politicians who defaulted on their campaign promises once they were in office.

Is that legally possible in the US?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Surely you jest?? Posted by: 6399
» RE: Surely you jest?? Posted by: nochicagoboys
Government Cutback
Posted by: Godfather89 on Sep 3, 2008 4:42 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All this spending is ridiculous. America was founded upon Independence for a reason. So our government does not go into debt, but no we want the government to spend even more $$$ away in a bureaucracy that cant even find millions of illegal immigrants let alone have the financial foresight to have seen that the Social Security and Medicare is going to engulf our budget before 2050 (it seems far off however that's when I am eligible for retirement and when I will most likely need care).

America we need independence again, free us from the bonds that bind us to bondage of people who seek to disempower the individual. Revolution! Vote Bob Barr 2008

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Finally, the fluff is blown away
Posted by: BST on Sep 3, 2008 4:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This commentary is significant and worthy of consideration for two reasons:

1. The issues it raises -- how are we going to continue on the path of healthcare chaos?
2. It holds Obama accountable. The media has wasted too much time on puffery. This must be true also of MCCain and the GOP.

Let's spend these weeks examining issues and informing candidates by letter of our wishes.

Voters really do have clout, if they want to make the effort to voice their concerns.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

jane
Posted by: goldpitt on Sep 3, 2008 5:23 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My fellow lefties, we all know that this is a two party game and that if we vote for some third party candidate, our vote will go to the republican party. I agree that we need universal health care and a slew of other reforms that neither candidate can offer. But this is the system we are under and we all know that Obama is a far cry better than McCain. Our system is broken. It is wrong and we all know it but until everyone steps up on both sides or until it just falls apart, we are stuck with it.

Health care will not be fixed by Obama this time around but it is a start. If we go negative now and risk electing another republican, we'll never have a chance to change anything.

Obama is not the messiah. He can't fix all of our problems in a two party system that is embolden to big money. No one can. The system itself has to collapse.

There are no simple or easy answers to health care reform. Obama is a start and we must take that first step now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: jane Posted by: KDelphi5950
» RE: jane Posted by: Bittersham2
Suzanne
Posted by: karin42 on Sep 3, 2008 5:52 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama's thoughts are to begin with something akin to what we have in Massachusetts which is far from perfect but a good beginning. It's unrealistic to think we can just dismantle existing health care, medical and pharmaceutical systems and set up a European health care system. As someone said they pay more than half their salaries in taxes for those services and it's not likely to win support here. So you begin by insuring everyone and lowering the cost. Progressives never win elections in this country because it's always "our way or the highway." Idealism over practicality...Obama's plan is a good start and he is a good organizer. He will put doctors and insurance and pharmaceutical people in a room and tell them to get to work and see what is possible. Let's not beat the crap out of the first chance we've had in a long time to make things better...for once...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Suzanne Posted by: rinpochet
» RE: Suzanne Posted by: nochicagoboys
Obama is bought and paid for by Wall Street.
Posted by: lindat on Sep 3, 2008 6:13 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A lot of people are going to be VERY disappointed and dismayed when this empty suit gets elected. The FISA sellout was just the begining.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the tentacles of the Beast
Posted by: zooeyhall on Sep 3, 2008 6:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Getting national health care in this country is going to be a Herculean task. There are several interlocking and mutually related problems (and not only medical care-related) that are going to have to be overcome:

1) The hugely profitable and very influential medical insurance industry, with thousands of employees.

2) Campaign finance reform: If you saw Michael Moore's "Sicko", you have an idea of how many of our congresspeople--of both parties--are feeding at the trough of the corporate medical industry.

3) A media that is totally in the pocket of the corporatocracy that rules in the U.S. Remember the "Harry and Louise" commercials during the last attempt at "reform"? We'll get that in spades if national health care becomes serious again.

All of the above groups, when it comes to money, will fight tooth and nail to block any real reform.

It all sounds so great: "Let's have national health care!" But the corporate-profit Beast that has to be dealt with would intimidate the bravest hero in mythology.

FDR wanted to have national health care in the 1930's. The medical establishment fought it so furiously that it wasn't until 30 years later that we finally got Medicare--and that was only for people over 65.

I am not hopefull.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: the tentacles of the Beast Posted by: mtnprivy
Peter Mackrael
Posted by: Peter Mackrael on Sep 3, 2008 6:57 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Universal Health Care is alive and well north of the border. The following was published in the Toronto Star newspaper on 3 September 2008.

TORONTO STAR, LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Positive brush with Canada's health system
Sep 03, 2008 04:30 AM

As Americans, we know Canada has socialized medicine and that its reputation was one of having to wait and wait to get help.

But our opinion, and respect, was significantly changed recently (June 26-July 3) when we had a first-hand experience with it. We had come to Toronto with friends for simply an overnight outing, when my husband had an acute heart attack at 1 a.m. What so amazed us was the overwhelmingly responsive, knowledgeable and skilled care we received from the moment I called the hotel desk asking for an ambulance through what would be an eight-day stay in Toronto General Hospital.

Literally, within five minutes of talking to the hotel operator, a manager was at our door to help; within 10 minutes, the Toronto fire department and the Toronto Ambulance Service were on site. The EMT expertly transported him, while notifying Toronto General's Coronary Intensive Care Unit (CICU). They in turn called the doctors in so that, within another 10 minutes, he was being examined. Thus, within one hour, my husband was on the operating table with the best surgeon possible.

The nursing and follow up care was exemplary. The knowledge, the style, the process – all first class. The communications between every staff member was exemplary. The attention to the patient was remarkable – every shift, every day. It was a major difference from what we have experienced in the States: no endless paperwork, nurses were respected by the doctors, everyone worked as a team – and one which was not threatened each day with a lawsuit or a swab-by-swab accountability. The patient benefited!

In this case, the entire city (Intercontinental Hotel staff, Toronto's fire department, the Toronto EMTs and Toronto General Hospital) fit together hand-in-glove and gave world-class treatment to an ill visitor to their country. Thank you and congratulations! By the way, my husband recovered in record time and is back playing golf.

Linda Keefe and Lou Hohman, Rochester, N.Y.

To read a brief argument in favor of universal health care, Google "universal health care" and select "The Case for Universal Health Care in the United States".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Peter Mackrael Posted by: KDelphi5950
» RE: Peter Mackrael Posted by: mrmystery
» RE: Peter Mackrael Posted by: cmaciain
Rep Copnyers HR 676
Posted by: KDelphi5950 on Sep 3, 2008 7:19 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
covers eveyone via Medicare , and is supported by almost al the Dems in the House, adn most of the Senate. If Obama would say he would back it/sign it , if it came to him--I'd vote for him! As HIghtower said, "Those who say it cant be done should not interfere with those who are doing it"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Balancing the Equation
Posted by: Romans1 on Sep 3, 2008 7:28 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Natioalized health care will bankrupt the country if there are not provisions for controlling costs. Controlling costs begins with salaries. A you willing to cap doctor's salaries at something reasonable, say $100,000 per year?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Balancing the Equation Posted by: Peter Mackrael
» RE: Balancing the Equation Posted by: Romans1
» RE: Balancing the Equation Posted by: Peter Mackrael
» RE: Balancing the Equation Posted by: crashgrab
the problem isn't corporations
Posted by: mrmystery on Sep 3, 2008 7:46 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the main problem with our healthcare isn't the private corporations. It's the fact that our citizens are so sick these days that our country can't afford the money it costs to give them healthcare. Our country as a whole pays much more in healthcare costs than any other country by far, and the amount we spend on medical bills continues to increase dramatically every year. This is why a single payer, universal healthcare system won't work for us right now. Too many obese people, smokers, drinkers, etc. etc. ...not to mention the thousands upon thousands of jobs that would be lost from closing private healthcare corporations. Humana is a large scale employer in Green Bay, a town that is already very economically depressed as it is. What do you think would happen to Green Bay if Humana closed down?? Do you think the people of Green Bay would agree with your opinion? Do you think they'd choose healthcare over their jobs??

Progressives and the left need to start realizing that there are tons of issues that require everyone's help to fix, such as healthcare. Everyone needs to start taking responsibility for their own health, their kids health, to insure that we can bring down our country's healthcare costs and fix the economy to the point where we can actually think about starting a single payer universal healthcare plan that works, self-sufficiently. There isn't a quick fix, and to just try to instate a universal, single payer plan now would be disastrous and simply leave millions of people underinsured instead of uninsured.

It's just like global warming. There are too many people that think the government needs to take care of the problem. Yet, they refuse to eat less meat, change their lightbulbs, and recycle. It's up too all of us to take care of our problems, not just the government. As barack likes to say, "I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper" Barack's change is just as much about inspiring people to be strong and change their own lives as it is about his policies changing our government.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: the problem isn't corporations Posted by: Peter Mackrael
» RE: the problem isn't corporations Posted by: Peter Mackrael
» RE: the problem isn't corporations Posted by: Peter Mackrael
the American Hell--the fundamental flaw
Posted by: zooeyhall on Sep 3, 2008 7:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let me give you my take on why we in the U.S.--of all the great countries of the world--still doesn't have guaranteed health care for it's most helpless citizens.

The great Romanian theologian Richard Wurmbrand was once asked how he envisioned his idea of Hell. He said it was a place where he saw a large group of people seated around a table where a sumptuous dinner was placed. He asked one of the people seated at the table: "what is your punishment?". The person replied: "we are all starving, but none of us are allowed to lift the food from the plate to our own mouth". Pastor Wurmbrand then asked "But why don't you just feed each other?". To which the condemned soul replied: "What? Feed HIM??? I'd rather go on starving!"

Pretty much and image of early 21st century American society.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The only way to go, really is
Posted by: steven w on Sep 3, 2008 7:59 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
socialized medicine, or we will never have health care worth a damn because they OVERCHARGE! and I don't see that ever changing. We could try, but I'm not too hopeful that things will ever change. John Kerry had a fairly good plan. But, the question is- How do you keep these little bastards from overcharging?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Congress
Posted by: Wildman on Sep 3, 2008 8:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lobby your Congress folks. If they send him better legislation,, he will likely sign it, but don't expect him to spend any political capital trying to move Congress toward a better plan than the one he wins with.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't throw the War to win a long standing battle
Posted by: Purple Girl on Sep 3, 2008 8:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sometimes it amazes me how issues like this become a 'NEW' Issue. Let me tell you this has been a long standing entrenched issue. It will not take one candidate to change this.We must change All our Public Servants stance. Health Insurance has been screwed Up for as long as there have been Health insurance companies skimming off health care.
Finally somone has had the Balls to design a Program which we have seen in action around the world for ever!
Finally this country has begun to think with it's head instead of it's ass! Remember when such Proposals were Called 'Socialist'. When it was thought you were a Traitor for even mentioning the idea of cutting out the middlemen?
So the Concept is not New, It has only been destigmatized by a System melt down and soaring costs.
Baby, People like me- who has worked in Long Term care, with Medicare and HMO's, KNOWS Universal (Socialized- Human Focused) Healthcare is the ONLY Healthcare plan which benefits People and Not Bricks & Mortar!
So Welcome Aboard- We're glad you finally showed Up!
But if you haven't noticed, Your life revolves around, and is controlled by, alot of Logo's.
So You want healthcare Taken back by the Dept of Health, You should also want your energy to be Owned & controlled by Your US Dept of Energy. Your Economy Run by the US Treasury, the US Labor Dept and the Commerce Dept- Not the Private Banking Firm "The Federal Reserve", Wall Street, or international Trade Commission.
You should want your National Defense be provide by those Who have an allegience to our country, not just their paychecks and Profit margins.
You should want your Food produced by independent farmers, who have committed themselve to this 'Labor of Love'.Who's product quality must be competitive to remain profitable. Instead of large Corps who hire 9-5's who know nothing about food safety and sound animal husbandry practices.Packingmore animals on to small areas- causing neglect,abuse and Disease
It's taken the Corps about a century to Conquer Our Democracy and Free market- it may take a Honest leader or two to Reclaim it.
At least there is an Opening for US at Obama's table....Mac's is swamped with Lobbists.Mac's Plan = a Bandaid & an Aspirin for Our gunshot wound.

Support Rep Conyers HR 676- It's a Human Issue , NOT a Political Issue

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It Is Time To Take Control of Our Health.
Posted by: Btelfare on Sep 3, 2008 8:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have agreed with the idea of universal health care for years. I started thinking about the health insurance plans over the years. People don't to think about prevention measures so my monthly contributions went up. The old primary care physician at the emergency room is expensive. Corporation America isn't going to do it. "Give them something to make health problems" may be their motto. American need to start a true campaign of prevention.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

New England Journal of Medicine has been doing many editorials on the candidates' plans
Posted by: fanny666 on Sep 3, 2008 8:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not sure if anybody can get to these pages, or if I'm just able to get to them because I'm at a university with an institutional subscription.

The New England Journal of Medicine did a poll to see what doctors think of the candidates' plans. 19% support McCain's plan. 34% support Obama's plan. 47% favor neither plan. The problem is that the Democrats aren't listening to Edwards- the insurance companies are not our friends, we should not be using taxpayer money to pay them. Like Edwards said, we need to take them on and beat them.

"Health of the Nation" panel discussion

The Partisan Divide — The McCain and Obama Plans for U.S. Health Care Reform (good overview of the plans)

Editorial: Health of the Nation — Coverage for All Americans

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We Must Change!
Posted by: thinkverybig on Sep 3, 2008 9:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Check out this video folks and share it with everyone you know please!

http://www.talk-it-out.com/video/video/
show?id=1876466%3AVideo%3A10190

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

dipconsult
Posted by: dipconsult on Sep 3, 2008 9:02 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here in France we have perhaps the best health care system in the world - though there are poor regional patches. True, the British system (which way back post WWII the French studied to their advantage) has become inefficient and excessively expensive mirroring the sad decline of British administrative standards under successive governments.

But there is no need to tolerate bad administration. The French don't. And America should not.

Mrs Clinton does seem, from what we read, to be the politician with by far the best ideas about establishing an effective US health care system.

My suggestion both to get universal health care in the US and to help Obama's still all too uncertain chances of winning the November election: he should announce (of course after asking her!) that Mme Clinton will be his health czar with full powers if he is elected.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We cannot possibly hold Barack accountable
Posted by: sbrown13 on Sep 3, 2008 9:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Chris Hedges is right about the problem, as usual, but wrong about how to solve it.

It would be great if we had an alternative party or candidate we could threaten to vote for if Barack disappointed us.

But that is an unconvincing threat. No matter how bad Barack becomes in this election campaign, it could never be bad enough to convince us to vote for McCain. Consequently, the Democratic Party can continue to rely on its eternal boast to progressives: "You have nowhere else to go."

We could build a viable third party, some day -- but this election is now. If McCain gets in, there is no doubt we will lose the Supreme Court, our civil liberties, our environment, and very likely our lives, as the world goes up in flames as a result of one or another of McCain's macho-driven imperialist ventures.

So we have no leverage to exert on Barack before he is elected. After he is elected, we will have even less. Except for one remote possibility -- remote because it seems so alien to American political culture -- and that is the General Strike.

In Europe, such a strike, or even its mere threat, has toppled ministers and even governments. That is because Europe has large and vigorous student and labor movements. They can call a hundred thousand students into the streets and many times that number of ordinary workers.

They can shut down vital services, bring their countries to a screeching halt, and often (not always, but frequently enough) bring their leaders to their senses, or at least to a proper respect for how far they can push their citizenry before their citizenry push back.

Yes, we have sometimes held large anti-war demonstrations in which hundreds of thousands participated -- in New York, Los Angeles, Washington, DC, and elsewhere. But these were only marches, staged mainly for the TV cameras and media. They were not well-planned attempts to disrupt (legally and non-violently, of course) the smooth functinoning of oppressive government machinery.

We cannot, alas, in this country -- as in France or Spain or Holland or Sweden -- persuade the scientists to leave their desks, corporate IT managers to walk away from their network servers, truck drivers to stop trucking, bus and taxi drivers to refuse passengers (or carry them for free), teachers to walk out of the classrooms, students to stop walking into them, retail stores to close, bank tellers to refuse to dispense cash, lawyers to cease litigating, and the few Congressmen and Senators on our side to commandeer the floors of their chambers to cheer the rebellious strikers on.

We cannot do that here because we lack not only a politically aware student population, but also a real labor movement (private sector union membership has plummeted from 37.9% in 1948 to a paltry 7.9% in 2004).

But we should still try. Only the threat -- and hopeful fulfillment -- of mass civil disobedience on a huge scale after the election is over -- will make our newely elected leaders honor the promises they made to get our votes, but which they will surely break as soon as they begin their terms of office.

Our only effective check on a presidential candidate whom we cannot afford to vote against is to follow the exhortation of Mario Savo:

"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part; you can't even passively take part, and you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!"

But it won't happen here any time soon, if ever.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

<